Site-Shot vs ScreenshotOne (2026): Pricing, Features & MCP Compared

Choosing a website screenshot API in 2026 usually comes down to two questions: how much does it cost at your volume, and how much engineering does it save you? Site-Shot and ScreenshotOne answer those questions very differently. Site-Shot leans lean and cheap — real Chromium rendering from a single GET request, with the lowest per-shot price in the market. ScreenshotOne is the premium, feature-rich option, with PDF and video output, native SDKs in seven languages, and a polished developer experience.

This post compares them fairly so you can pick the right tool. One thing up front, because it matters: Site-Shot's free, no-signup screenshot tool is the in-browser tool on its homepage — you paste a URL and get an image, no account, no key. The paid Site-Shot API (and the ScreenshotOne API) both require an account and an API key. We keep that distinction honest throughout.

At a glance

Feature	Site-Shot	ScreenshotOne
Free tier / no-signup	Yes — free in-browser tool, no signup, no API key	Yes — 100 screenshots/mo free (account required); no credit card
Entry price	$5/mo (X-Lite, 2,000 shots)	$17/mo (Basic, 2,000 shots)
~Cost per 1,000	$2.50 (X-Lite)	$8.50 (Basic)
Cost at scale	$0.80/1,000 (Professional, 625,000 shots)	$5.18/1,000 (Scale, 50,000 shots)
Full-page capture	Yes — up to 20,000px	Yes — full_page=true
Ad + cookie removal	Yes — no_ads, no_cookie_popup	Yes — block_ads, block_cookie_banners
Geo / proxy	Yes — country proxies (IP, language, time zone, geolocation)	Yes — custom proxy, ip_country_code, geolocation
Official MCP server	Yes — npx -y site-shot-mcp	Yes — github.com/screenshotone/mcp
Native SDKs	No — plain HTTP API	Yes — 7 languages (Go, Java, Ruby, Python, C#, PHP, JS/TS)

Pricing compared

Pricing is where the two diverge most clearly. Both bill by screenshot volume, and both have a free entry point, but the paid tiers sit at different price points.

Site-Shot's cheapest paid plan is X-Lite at $5/mo for 2,000 shots, which works out to $2.50 per 1,000. As you climb the tiers it gets dramatically cheaper: Lite is $15/mo for 10,000, Optimal is $50/mo for 50,000, and Professional is $500/mo for 625,000 shots — that last tier is $0.0008 per shot, or $0.80 per 1,000.

ScreenshotOne's cheapest paid plan is Basic at $17/mo for 2,000 shots, which is $8.50 per 1,000, with $0.009 per overage shot. Higher tiers improve the rate: Growth is $79/mo for 10,000 ($7.90/1,000) and Scale is $259/mo for 50,000 ($5.18/1,000). ScreenshotOne also bills only successful requests, and cached screenshots do not consume quota — a nice touch if you re-request the same URLs often.

On a pure per-shot basis, Site-Shot is meaningfully cheaper at every comparable tier, and the gap widens at scale. ScreenshotOne's price buys a broader feature set, which is the fair trade to keep in mind. See the full pricing details for current numbers.

Features compared

The core job — turn a URL into an image — both do well, with real browser rendering rather than a cheap HTML-to-image shortcut.

Site-Shot captures with real Chromium and returns PNG/JPEG, or JSON containing a base64 image plus the target page's response headers, all from a single GET request — no SDK, no async job to poll. It supports full-page capture up to 20,000px, device and viewport emulation, country-specific proxies (IP, language, time zone, and geolocation), and automatic ad and cookie-banner removal via no_ads and no_cookie_popup. The design goal is "one request, one result," which keeps integration trivial in any language that can make an HTTP call.

ScreenshotOne is the more feature-rich, premium option. Alongside full-page capture (full_page=true, with full_page_scroll), ad blocking (block_ads), and cookie-banner removal (block_cookie_banners), it adds capabilities Site-Shot does not have today: PDF rendering, MP4 / animated capture (output formats include PNG, JPEG, WebP, PDF, and MP4), dark mode, direct S3 upload, async rendering with webhooks, and stealth mode. For geo targeting it offers a custom proxy option, ip_country_code, and explicit geolocation coordinates. If your project needs rendering beyond a static image, ScreenshotOne covers it natively.

The honest gap for Site-Shot: there are no native SDKs yet — it's a plain HTTP API. For most teams that's a non-issue (a single GET is easy to wrap), but if you want an idiomatic client library, ScreenshotOne ships official SDKs in seven languages: Go, Java, Ruby, Python, C# (.NET), PHP, and JavaScript/TypeScript.

AI agents & MCP

Both vendors ship an official Model Context Protocol server, so an AI agent like Claude or a Cursor workflow can capture screenshots as a tool call rather than hand-rolling HTTP plumbing.

Site-Shot's MCP server runs with npx -y site-shot-mcp (registry id io.github.site-shot/site-shot-mcp) and exposes capture_screenshot and capture_full_page tools. ScreenshotOne's official server (github.com/screenshotone/mcp) is a TypeScript, MIT-licensed implementation maintained by the ScreenshotOne org, exposing a render-website-screenshot tool.

Both are solid choices for agent workflows. Site-Shot's edge here is cost — agents that fire a lot of captures benefit from the lower per-shot price — while ScreenshotOne's broader output formats (PDF, video) can matter if your agent needs more than an image.

When ScreenshotOne is the better choice

To be fair, ScreenshotOne wins in several real situations:

• You need more than images. PDF rendering, MP4 / animated capture, and dark-mode rendering are first-class features. Site-Shot does not offer these.
• You want a native SDK. If your team would rather pip install or go get an official client than wrap a GET request, ScreenshotOne's seven SDKs are a genuine convenience.
• You need pipeline plumbing built in. Direct S3 upload, async rendering with webhooks, and stealth mode are baked in, which can save you from building that infrastructure yourself.
• You value caching economics. Not billing for cached screenshots can offset the higher per-shot price for workloads that repeatedly request the same URLs.

It's the premium, most feature-rich option in this comparison, and that premium is doing real work.

When Site-Shot is the better choice

Site-Shot is the better fit when:

• Cost per shot is the priority. At $2.50/1,000 entry and $0.80/1,000 at scale, Site-Shot is several times cheaper than ScreenshotOne at comparable volumes — the bigger the volume, the bigger the gap.
• You want zero-signup, zero-key for one-off captures. The free in-browser tool needs no account and no API key, which is great for quick manual grabs or trying it out.
• You want the simplest possible integration. A single GET returns the image (or JSON with base64 plus the target's response headers) — no SDK, no async job, no polling.
• You need long full-page captures or country proxies on a budget. Full pages up to 20,000px and country-specific proxies (IP, language, time zone, geolocation) come standard, plus automatic ad and cookie-banner removal.

If your needs are "good screenshots, cheaply, with minimal code," Site-Shot is hard to beat.

FAQ

Is ScreenshotOne or Site-Shot cheaper?

Site-Shot is cheaper at every comparable tier. Its cheapest paid plan is X-Lite at $5/mo for 2,000 shots ($2.50 per 1,000), versus ScreenshotOne's Basic at $17/mo for 2,000 shots ($8.50 per 1,000). At scale the gap grows: Site-Shot's Professional plan reaches $0.80 per 1,000, while ScreenshotOne's Scale tier is about $5.18 per 1,000. ScreenshotOne's higher price buys a broader feature set, including PDF and video output and native SDKs.

Does Site-Shot work with AI agents / MCP?

Yes. Site-Shot ships an official MCP server you can run with npx -y site-shot-mcp (registry id io.github.site-shot/site-shot-mcp). It exposes capture_screenshot and capture_full_page tools for Claude, Cursor, and other MCP-compatible agents. ScreenshotOne also offers an official MCP server, so both work in agent workflows.

Do I need an account or API key to use Site-Shot?

For the free in-browser tool on the homepage, no — there is no signup and no API key. For the paid Site-Shot API you do need an account and an API key (SITESHOT_API_KEY). The same is true of ScreenshotOne: its API requires an account and a key, though it also offers 100 free screenshots per month without a credit card.

Which one should I choose for full-page screenshots?

Both support full-page capture. Site-Shot handles full pages up to 20,000px and is the cheaper option per shot. ScreenshotOne also supports full-page capture (full_page=true) and adds extras like PDF output and async rendering. Choose Site-Shot for cost-efficient image capture, or ScreenshotOne if you also need PDF, video, or native SDKs.

For a wider view, see our full 8-tool comparison.

Try the free no-signup screenshot tool or compare API plans on the pricing page.