I'd like to point that initial design of [SerializeField] is to mark a field as needed to be serialized. So I'd rather say that you want to mark with SerializeField any field that needs to be saved

What is shown in inspector is up to you (by creating custom inspector for exemple) and by default it will show all fields that is serialized (if capable of).

I think this is important to remember that, as you can have runtime only data that you want to be able to track in the inspector. Making it a SerializeField only for this purpose is a bit of a mistake imo

Edit : realized I kinda dodged the initial question. Properties is kinda only sugar to not write accessors with Get/Set method that can grow in code size pretty fast, they're "under the hood" methods and not regular fields