The Hubble has no propulsion system of any kind. Reconnaissance satellites do have propulsion systems that allow them to adjust their orbits, change tasking, and do some other things that I'm not going to discuss.

As for focal lengths, that isn't my area. However, taking an image while staring at almost infinitely distant objects is a very different task from taking an image of the ground passing a couple hundred miles below you. To do its job, the Hubble uses 2D CCD arrays. Most imaging satellites use 1D CCDs for strip imagery.

Other than that, there isn't much I feel comfortable discussing about imagery satellites. Don't read too much into the shipping container being the same. There are a lot of factors, such as booster attach points, that are the same without necessarily implying a lot of commonality between the HST and imagery satellites. Remember, at one time, they planned on launching imagery satellites on military shuttle missions from Vandenberg. That idea was abandoned after the Challenger explosion.

I asked some people I know who have years of experience with those satellites what they thought of the writeups at FAS. They all laughed and said Pike got most things wrong.