Dh's dad was 47 when he had his eldest, 51 when dh was born. The generational gap was not a problem: FIL was an adaptable, energetic, hands-on dad who was interested in life and willing to learn until he died (by which time his youngest was 42).
As for physical ability, FIL was mildly disabled since his teens from TB, so he would never have been able to run after them or play football. Does that mean he should never have had children at all?
My nephew's mum was 45 when he was born (his dad was younger). I was 12 years younger and used to envy my SIL for her seemingly endless energy and enthusiasm. The only difference is that retirement/ageing came at a time when her nephew was still a young man, so yes, there were financial decisions to be made. But both in this case and in the case of my ILs the financial situation was considerably mitigated by the fact that the other parent was younger and able to be the main breadwinner.
What matters, I think, is what you're willing to do with your mental and physical capabilities. Is your dh the kind of person who is naturally adaptable and energetic? Is he in reasonable health? Is he the kind of person who might be willing to look after himself?